AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Chandru, J.—This matter came to be posted on being specially ordered by the order of the Hon''ble Chief Justice dated 29.08.2009.
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is having a service connection in a shop owned by her at Besant Nagar. In view of the alleged
energy theft, a criminal case was filed against the petitioner, which is pending before the XI Metropolitan Magistrate at Saidapet, Chennai in C.C.
No. 7010 of 2003. The trial is yet to take place. In the mean while, the petitioner had filed an application for compounding the offence. There was
some difficulty expressed and the matter is yet to be compounded.
When the matter was pending trial, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to apply the
provisions of compounding of offences as available u/s 152 of the Electricity Act 2003 and G.O.Ms. No. 118, Energy (B2), 27.11.2006 to the
petitioner''s case, in which the theft of energy was detected on 21.08.2001
The short question that arises for consideration is whether the theft which had taken place before the notification of the relevant provision of the
2003 Act can have the benefit of the subsequent enactment.
The matter of energy theft are specific offences under the old Act as well as 2003 Act. When the matter is pending before the competent trial
court, this Court is not inclined to give direction to the respondents by exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. When the
issue is raised and not answered by the trial court or despite the issue being raised by the petitioner, but the learned Magistrate has certain doubts
with respect to the legal provisions, Section 395 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 provides for referring the matter to this Court for opinion
by this Court.
Therefore, it is not proper for this Court to render any finding on this issue especially when the petitioner is facing criminal charges. Any opinion
expressed in this writ petition will affect the proceedings of the trial court. Hence this Court refrains from giving any opinion on this issue. Suffice to
say that the petitioner will have to raise the issue before the trial court and must agitate the same. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No
costs.